Does the Hoan Bridge really merit redecking at a cost that is estimated to top $200 million?
I’ve asked that question more than once, because it’s a question that merits an honest answer. I’ve made it clear I’m not opposed to the idea of tearing down the Hoan and building a street-level parkway with lower bridges spanning access to the Port of Milwaukee’s inner harbor, because it seems like a sensible solution that may actually have added benefits to the South Shore suburbs, from the standpoint of connectivity. While supporters of redecking have been busy spreading their hyperbolic message that the Hoan will be torn down without a replacement while at the same time proposing toll roads to pay for the Hoan Bridge redecking, it’s worth noting that traffic volume on the bridge may not merit spending hundreds of millions of dollars now – and hundreds of millions of dollars more in the not too distant future – to redeck the Hoan Bridge now and then replace its superstructure in 20 more years.
Over at the Walker’s Point blog, Rob has done a great job of illustrating the fact that the Hoan Bridge simply isn’t being used that much, when compared to I-94 north of Lapham Avenue and west of the 60th Street:
Given the fact that traffic on the Hoan Bridge has largely been stagnant – even during the time the Marquette Interchange was being reconstructed – does it really make good fiscal sense to pour money hand over fist into repairing a bridge that’s underutilized and quickly reaching the end of its design life?
Instead of dismissing any other options that don’t involve redecking the Hoan Bridge, Milwaukee County Supervisor Pat Jursik should show a little willingness to hear all the options involving the Hoan Bridge, especially considering not all her constituents share her narrow view when it comes to the Hoan Bridge.
H/T to Rob at Walker’s Point.
Zach, I cannot ever understand your logic. Your statement of “does it really make good fiscal sense to pour money hand over fist into repairing a bridge that’s underutilized and quickly reaching the end of its design life”, yet you want to pour money hand over fist for rail. It might be that you forget you support the ever needed sinkhole that rail would be.
Rail will be so underutilized it would be laughable.
It is clean, you don’t want the Hoan Bridge, just have the guts to clear say it instead of hiding behind, all options need to be on the table and studied.
Jeff, what’s clear is that you really don’t know what you’re talking about. I use the Hoan Bridge every day, so I’m not against keeping it in place. What I am against is keeping it in place if it’s going to end up costing hundreds of millions of dollars to fix now, and hundreds of millions of dollars more to fix in twenty or so years.
As for your comments about rail, I’ll just note that light rail ridership is up in most cities where that’s an option.
I rarely use the Hoan Bridge, so I really don’t have a dog in this fight. However, It seems silly to me to even begin thinking about doing anything with regard to this structure when the zoo interchange is in such a state of disrepair. You can actually see rebars through the concrete posts and overpass decks! Now they are limited trucking at that particular interchange. Please fix the zoo interchange first before it completely falls apart!
Mortified, the Hoan Bridge is in terrible shape as well. The roadway itself is in bad shape, and like the Zoo Interchange, you can see rebar in a number of places.